As it becomes increasingly likely that the Gray Davis recall will qualify for the ballot, the politics become ever more Byzantine and the danger that California's government becomes further destabilized ever more real.

The resulting frenzy of speculation has put virtually every big name in California politics in play, even if its owner has no intention of getting into this swamp. California's crazy recall system invites the turmoil.

Under state law, a recall is a two-step dance. Voters will first vote on whether they want to recall Davis. No matter how they come down on that question, they will then face a second question: Who should replace Davis if the recall musters a majority of votes? If the recall carries, the next governor will be the candidate who wins a plurality of votes on that second ballot. With, say, eight people on the ballot, a candidate with 15 percent of the vote could become governor, even though 45 percent of voters oppose recalling Davis. Think about that as a mandate and a test of gubernatorial legitimacy.

The resulting permutations drive the political frenzy. If either major party can keep all but one of its major figures from running, that candidate will have a far better chance than if there are, say, four people dividing the Republican vote. But as GOP consultant Dan Schnur says, neither party is famous for that kind of discipline.

And so there are endless scenarios. Republican congressman Darrell Issa, without whose money this recall would be dead in the water, has already said he'll run -- at least if the recall qualifies for a special election this fall. But of course, there's also actor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who's dropped broad hints he'll run. Then there's Bill Simon, who was so weak that he couldn't beat even the widely detested Davis but who seems to be thinking about it.

As to the Democrats, the political wise people say that Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante is almost certain to run if the recall qualifies since his odds are much better in a multi-candidate race in which he's the only Latino. That (it is also speculated) would bring in Attorney General Bill Lockyer and (maybe) Treasurer Phil Angelides.

The other day, Sen. Dianne Feinstein's chief of staff, Mark Kadesh, said Feinstein "enjoys being California's senior senator," and "has absolutely no plans to run for governor." But that hasn't kept her name out of the speculation.

Feinstein, the 800-pound gorilla in California politics, probably wouldn't run unless Democrats cleared the field for her. But since, as governor, she could appoint her successor (as Gov. Pete Wilson did in 1991), she could make Bustamante an offer that he probably couldn't refuse. And then, of course, she could appoint Bustamante's successor.

But why on Earth would she (or, for that matter, any other sober person) want a job that, given California's huge budget problems and legislative gridlock, is more likely to lead to yet another political funeral than to any great triumph? Some of California's political wise people -- Democrats and some Republicans -- believe that even Issa's campaign is aimed as much at laying the groundwork for a run against Sen. Barbara Boxer next year as it is at securing three years of torment in Sacramento.

There's no certainty that Davis will be recalled. Last week's poll by the Public Policy Institute of California, in which 51 percent of voters say they'd vote to recall Davis, while 43 percent say they wouldn't, makes it a very close call.

But if Davis is recalled, it would almost certainly shock the system as nothing has since the passage of Proposition 13 just 25 years ago. In 1911, when California voters wrote the initiative, referendum and recall into the state constitution, the margin for the recall amendment was far higher than it was on the initiative.

But in the 92 years since, while scores of initiatives have passed, no recall of a statewide officeholder has even qualified for the ballot. Scores of school board members and other local officials have been recalled, but no one holding statewide office has even faced such a vote.

Nor, according to political scientist Thomas Cronin, probably the leading authority in the field, has any U.S. governor been recalled since North Dakotans recalled their governor in 1921. (In 1988, Arizona Gov. Evan Mecham probably would have been recalled if he hadn't been impeached first.)

Cronin suggests two reasons. One is the high threshold to qualify a recall (in California, signatures equal to 12 percent of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial race; statutory initiatives require 5 percent). The other is the establishment's fear (in this case including the White House and the California Business Roundtable) of the political bloodletting and collateral damage that comes with a recall.

But the political climate, here and in Washington -- not least the Clinton impeachment -- is now as ugly as it's been in generations. Davis himself has contributed to the ugliness. But the ultimate loser if the recall qualifies will not be any individual. It will be the political system itself.